The National Audit Office (NAO) report ‘Universal Credit:
Early Progress’ was as damning as is possible for such a report to be. It
criticised the governance, planning and oversight of the whole project, whose
initial timetable has slipped alarmingly and final delivery date of next Autumn
looks exceptionally optimistic. Replacing
six benefits with one is not as simple as it seems. Paying the housing element
to the claimant is less simple than paying it to the landlord. And what UC
simplifies, the bedroom tax and localisation of council tax support make
complicated again. At what point are
gains outweighed by the losses? UC is currently in its pilot phase, and some of
the data coming out of these pilots, particularly regarding the housing benefit
aspects, is pretty worrying. UC was oversold as a silver bullet to tackle
poverty/worklessness/ benefit dependency, call it what you want. But the
benefit system has only ever been one part of the problem, and reducing efforts
to tackle such issues to a piece of software was always going to fall short. Read
more on the New Policy Institute website.
There’s no point building homes that people can’t afford | Letters
-
Readers respond to Polly Toynbee’s article about the tussle between central
government and local planners in Kent
Polly Toynbee’s piece misses the centra...
14 hours ago
No comments:
Post a Comment